Pesticidal composition comprising sulphur, insecticide and an agrochemical excipient

ABSTRACT

The present invention relates to an pesticidal composition comprising an effective amount of a sulphur; an effective amount of at least one insecticide selected from the group consisting of cartap fipronil, pirimicarb, buprofezine, thiachloprid, acetamiprid, clothianidin, diafenthiuron, novaluron, flubendiamide, spirotetramat, thiamethoxam, imidacloprid or salts thereof, and at least one agrochemically acceptable excipient.

RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a Continuation of application Ser. No. 13/981,617,filed Jan. 30, 2012, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,017,734, issued Apr. 28, 2015,which claims the priority benefit of §371 international ApplicationPCT/IN2012/000066, filed Jan. 30, 2012, and Indian Application No.251/MUM/2011, filed Jan. 28, 2011, which applications are incorporatedherein for all purposes.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention

The present invention relates to a pesticidal composition comprising aneffective amount of sulphur; an effective amount of at least oneinsecticide or salt thereof, and at least one agrochemically acceptableexcipient. The invention further relates to a method of application ofthe pesticidal composition to crops.

2. Description of the Related Art

The role of elemental sulphur as a pesticide has been known for a longtime. The role of sulphur in controlling, inhibiting and eradicating thegrowth of fungi such as mildews is well known. Sulphur is mostlyavailable in its elemental form and different formulations such asgranules, pellets, powders, etc. are known for providing sulphur in aform for use as a fertilizer or pesticide. Sulphur formulations usedalone are good to moderately effective against powdery mildew and mites.They are also used as clean up applications for hibernating mitepopulations before the onset of plant protection schedules inhorticultural and perennial crops like tea. Sulphur not only works as aacaricide, for example on powdery mildew but is also used as asupplementary plant nutrient and fungicide.

Further demands on insecticidal and acaricidal compounds include reducedphytotoxicity, reduced dosage, substantial broadening of spectrum andincreased safety, to name a few.

The biological properties of known compounds are not entirelysatisfactory in the areas of pest control, phytotoxicity, andenvironmental and worker exposure, for example. In particular, it hasbeen observed that the pests show resistance to the pesticide, which areat times administered in higher dosages to achieve the desired control,hereby leading to soil toxicity and other environmental hazards, besideshigher costs.

Hence, there is a need to develop a composition which addresses theproblem of resistance and soil toxicity and also is used at reduceddosages, controls environmental damage, offers broader crop protectionspectrum, improved and healthy foliage, rainfastness, improved cropyield, saves labour, better grain quality and management against variousinsects and pests, improves plant growth, and is yet cost-effective tothe end user.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

It has now been discovered that a pesticidal composition comprising aneffective amount of a sulphur, an effective amount of at least oneinsecticide selected from the group consisting of cartap fipronil,pirimicarb, buprofezine, thiachloprid, acetamiprid, clothianidin,diafenthiuron, novaluron, flubendiamide, spirotetramat, thiamethoxam,imidacloprid or salts thereof and at least one agrochemically acceptabledemonstrated excellent efficacy against various pests and mites forexample, Lepidoptera, various suckig pests, termites etc. Surprisingly,the inventors of the application have discovered that a pesticidalcomposition comprising sulphur in the range from 32.5% to 90%, abamectinin the range from 0.08% to 3.6% and its salts thereof and at least oneagrochemically acceptable excipient demonstrates surprisingly excellentefficacy for example, against red spider mites and leaf minor.

Surprisingly, the inventors of the application have also discovered thatthe pesticidal composition comprising sulphur in the range from 30% to90%, lambda-cyhalothrin in the range from 0.35% to 4% or its saltsthereof and at least one agrochemically acceptable excipient was highlyefficacious against the pests and the mite populations.

The pesticidal compositions offers a broad spectrum of protection,addresses the concerns of resistance, improves foliage, improvesrainfastedness and in various instances, improves crop yield and grainquality. The compositions disclosed herein, also serve as anintervention application between very specific actives, which alone arelikely to lead to resistance in areas of epidemic and high frequency ofpesticidal application.

Quite advantageously, in certain cases, the compositions can be appliedas a foliar spray or to the soil, through broadcasting or through dripor trickle irrigation. The latter case of drip or trickle irrigationfurther optimizes farming practices, which are greatly challenged by anever-increasing labour and water shortage. In some cases, it has beenobserved, that the compositions at very low concentrations of the activeingredients can be effectively applied, thereby reducing the burden onthe environment. In certain cases, it has also been noted that thecompositions at lower rates of the active ingredients in combinationtogether provided a longer duration of control of the pest and avoidedpest outbreak and resurgence.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

In describing the embodiments of the invention, specific terminology isresorted for the sake of clarity. However, it is not intended that theinvention be limited to the specific terms so selected and it is to beunderstood that each specific term includes all technical equivalentsthat operate in a similar manner to accomplish a similar purpose.

The present invention relates to a pesticidal composition comprising aneffective amount of sulphur, an effective amount of at least oneinsecticide selected from the group consisting of cartap fipronil,pirimicarb, buprofezine, thiachloprid, acetamiprid, clothianidin,diafenthiuron, novaluron, flubendiamide, spirotetramat, thiamethoxam,imidacloprid or salts thereof and at least one agrochemically acceptableexcipient.

According to an embodiment, sulphur is present in a range from 20% to90% of the weight of the composition. According to an embodiment theinsecticide is present in a range from 0.1% to 40% of the weight of thecomposition.

The pesticidal composition can be in a solid form or a liquid form or agel. For example, the pesticidal composition may be in the form ofemulsion concentrates, wettable powders, suspension concentrates, suspoemulsions, microemulsions, capsulated suspension, water dispersiblegranules, pellets, seed dressings or emulsions for seed treatment,broadcast granules, gel, emulsions in water, oil dispersions, etc.

Preferably, the pesticidal composition is in the form of waterdispersible granules. When the composition is the in the form of waterdispersible granules, usually, sulphur is present in the range of 40% to90% and the insecticide is usually present in the range of 0.1% to 40%of the total composition.

Preferably, the pesticidal composition IS m the form of suspensionconcentrates. When the composition is in the form suspensionconcentrates, usually, sulphur is present in the range of 20% to 70% andthe insecticide is present in the range from 0.25% to 17.5% of the totalcomposition.

Water dispersible granules can be defined as a pesticide formulationconsisting of granules to be applied after disintegration and dispersionin water. As described herein, “WG” or “WDG” refer to water dispersiblegranules.

Suspension concentrate can be defined as a stable suspension of solidpesticides in a fluid usually intended for dilution with water beforeuse. As described herein, “SC” refers to suspension concentrates.

As defined herein, WP refers to a wettable powder, which can be a powderformulation to be applied as a suspension after dispersion in water. Asdefined herein, EC refers to an emulsifiable concentrate, which can be aliquid homogenous formulation to be applied as an emulsion afterdilution in water. As described herein, OD refers to an oil dispersionwhich is a stable suspension of active ingredient(s) in awater-immiscible fluid, which may contain other dissolved activeingredients(s), intended for dilution with water before use. Asdescribed herein, ZC refers to a stable suspension of capsules andactive ingredient, in fluid, normally intended for dilution with waterbefore use. As described herein, gel refers to a sol in which the solidparticles are meshed such that a rigid or semi-rigid mixture results. Asdescribed herein, CS refers to capsulated suspension which is a stablesuspension of micro-encapsulated active ingredient in an aqueouscontinuous phase, intended for dilution with water before use. Asdescribed herein, SE refers to Suspo Emulsion, which is a fluidheterogenous formulation consisting of active ingredients in the form ofsolid particles and and fine globules in continuous water phase.

As described herein, the abbreviation “DAS” refers to Days AfterSpraying. As described herein, the abbreviation “DAT” refers to Daysafter Transplanting. As described herein, the abbreviation “DAP” refersto Days after Planting.

According to an embodiment, the composition comprises sulphur is in therange from 50% to 90% and cartap hydrochloride in the range from 2.25%to 15% of the total weight of the composition. According to anotherembodiment, the composition comprising sulphur and cartap hydrochlorideis in the form of wettable powder or broadcast granules which are waterdispersible.

According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 40% to 90% andfipronil in the range from 0.3% to 10% of the total weight of thecomposition. According to another embodiment, sulphur is in the rangefrom 80% to 90% and fipronil is in the range from 0.3% to 10% of thetotal weight of the composition in the form of water dispersiblegranules. According to still another embodiment, sulphur is in the rangefrom 40% to 70% and fipronil is in the range of 0.3% to 10% of the totalcomposition in the form of suspension concentrate. According to yetanother embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 60% to 90% and fipronilis in the range of 0.3% to 1% of the total composition in the form ofbroadcast granules which are water dispersible.

Broadcast granules which include sulphur and cartap hydrochloride orsulphur and fipronil, may be applied to the soil by broadcasting orthrough trickle or drip irrigation to effectively reach the roots ofdesired crops.

According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 30% to 75% andpirimicarb in the range from 2.5% to 9% of the total weight of thecomposition. According to another embodiment, sulphur is in the rangefrom 60% to 75% and pirimicarb is in the range from 5% to 9% of thetotal weight of the composition in the form of water dispersiblegranules. According to still another embodiment, sulphur is in the rangefrom 30% to 70% and pirimicarb is in the range from 2.5% to 3% of thetotal weight of the composition in the form of suspension concentrate.

According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 30% to 75% andbuprofezine in the range from 5% to 25% of the total weight of thecomposition. According to another embodiment, sulphur is in the rangefrom 40% to 75% and buprofezin is in the range from 10% to 20% of thetotal weight of the composition in the form of water dispersiblegranules. According to another embodiment, sulphur is in the range from30% to 70% and buprofezine is in the range from 5% to 10% of the totalweight of the composition in the form of suspension concentrate.

According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 30% to 80% andthiacloprid in the range from 3% to 10% of the total weight of thecomposition. According to another embodiment, sulphur is in the rangefrom 60% to 80% and thiacloprid is in the range from 6% to 10% of thetotal weight of the composition in the form of water dispersiblegranules. According to another embodiment, sulphur is in the range from30% to 70% and thiacloprid is in the range from 3% to 10% of the totalweight of the composition in the form of suspension concentrate.

According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 35% to 80% andacetamiprid in the range from 0.5% to 5% of the total weight of thecomposition. According to another embodiment, sulphur is in the rangefrom 50% to 80% and acetamiprid is in the range from 0.5% to 3% of thetotal weight of the composition in the form of water dispersiblegranules or water soluble granules or wettable powders.

According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 25% to 80% andclothianidin is in the range from 0.25% to 3% of the total weight of thecomposition. According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from50% to 80% and clothianidin is in the range of 0.5% to 3% of the totalweight of the composition in the form of water dispersible granules.According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 30% to 70% andclothianidin is in the range of 0.25% to 1.5% of the total weight of thecomposition in the form of suspension concentrate.

According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 20% to 75% anddiafenthiuron in the range from 7.5% to 50% of the total weight of thecomposition. According to another embodiment, sulphur is in the rangefrom 40% to 75% and diafenthiuron is in the range from 12% to 40% of thetotal weight of the composition in the form of water dispersiblegranules. According to another embodiment, sulphur is in the range from30% to 70% and diafenthiuron is in the range from 7.5% to 17.5% of thetotal weight of the composition in the form of suspension concentrate.

According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 35% to 80% andnovaluron in the range from 1.25% to 10% of the total weight of thecomposition. According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from70% to 80% and novaluron is in the range of 2.5% to 10% of the totalweight of the composition in the form of water dispersible granules.According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 35% to 70% andnovaluron is in the range from 1.25% to 4% of the total weight of thecomposition in the form of suspension concentrate.

According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 25% to 80% andflubendiamide is in the range from 1% to 6% of the total weight of thecomposition. According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from60% to 80% and flubendiamide is in the range from 1% to 6% of the totalweight of the composition in the form of water dispersible granules.According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 25% to 70% andflubendiamide is in the range from 1% to 4% of the total weight of thecomposition in the form of suspension concentrate.

According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 25% to 80% andspirotetramat is in the range from 2% to 13% of the total weight of thecomposition. According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from50% to 80% and spirotetramat is in the range from 3% to 13% of the totalweight of the composition in the form of water dispersible granules.According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 25% to 70% andspirotetramat is in the range from 2% to 10% of the total weight of thecomposition in the form of suspension concentrate.

According to an embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 25% to 80% andthiamethoxam is in the range from 0.67% to 5% of the total weight of thecomposition. According to another embodiment, sulphur is in the rangefrom 50% to 80% and thiamethoxam is in the range from 1.5% to 10% of thetotal weight of the composition in the form of water dispersiblegranules or water soluble granules or wettable powders. According toanother embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 25% to 70% andthiamethoxam is in the range from 0.67% to 5% of the total weight of thecomposition in the form of suspension concentrates.

According to another embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 25% to 90%and imidacloprid in the range from 0.1% to 4% of the total weight of thecomposition. According to another embodiment, sulphur is in the rangefrom 50% to 80% and imidacloprid is in the range from 0.1% to 4% of thetotal weight of the composition in the form of water dispersiblegranules. According to another embodiment, sulphur is in the range from25% to 70% and imidacloprid is in the range from 0.1% to 4% of the totalweight of the composition in the form of suspension concentrates.According to yet another embodiment, sulphur is in the range from 50% to90% and imidacloprid is in the range from 0.1% to 4% of the total weightof the composition in the form of granules for broadcast application.

According to an embodiment, the compositions comprising sulphur andimidacloprid can also be in the form of a gel.

The invention further relates to a pesticidal composition comprisingsulphur in the range from 32.5% to 90%, abamectin in the range from0.08% to 3.6% of the total weight of the composition and at least oneagrochemically acceptable excipient. According to an embodiment, sulphuris in the range from 65% to 90% and abamectin is in the range from 0.08%to 3.6% of the total weight of the composition in the form of waterdispersible granules. According to another embodiment, sulphur is in therange from 32.5% to 70% and abamectin is in the range from 0.75% to 3.6%of the total weight of the composition in the form of suspensionconcentrate.

The invention further relates to a pesticidal composition comprisingsulphur in the range from 40% to 90%, lambda-cyhalothrin in the rangefrom 0.5% to 5% of the total weight of the composition, and at least oneagrochemically acceptable excipient.

According to an embodiment, the composition comprising sulphur andlambda cyhalothrin is in the form of wettable powder. According to anembodiment, the composition comprising sulphur and lambda cyhalothrincan be in the form of a ZC. According to yet another embodiment, thecomposition comprising sulphur and lambda-cyhalothrin can be in the formof a gel.

According to yet another embodiment, the at least one agrochemicallyacceptable excipient can comprise wetting agents, dispersing agents,emulsifiers binding agents, sticking agents, fillers, diluents,solvents, coating agents and stabilizers. However, those skilled in theart will appreciate that it is possible to utilize additionalagrochemically acceptable excipients without departing from the scope ofthe present invention. The agrochemically acceptable excipient is in therange from 7% to 80% of the total weight of the composition.

Wetting agents which can be commonly used include sulfosuccinates,naphthalene sulfonates, sulfated esters, phosphate esters, sulfatedalcohol and alkyl benzene sulfonates. However, those skilled in the artwill appreciate that it is possible to utilize other wetting agentsknown in the art without departing from the scope of the invention.

Dispersing agents which can be commonly used include polycarboxylates,naphthalene sulfonate condensates, phenol sulfonic acid condensates,lignosulfonates, methyl oleyl taurates and polyvinyl alcohols. However,those skilled in the art will appreciate that it is possible to utilizeother dispersing agents known in the art without departing from thescope of the invention.

Emulsifiers can be of the anionic, cationic or non-ionic type.Emulsifiers which do not cause the liquid active substance to solidifyare particularly preferred. Some liquid actives are completely misciblein water and may not require an emulsifier. These emulsifiers areusually used in admixture. The emulsifiers which are commonly usedinclude ethoxylated and ethopropoxylated alcohols and nonyl phenols,ethoxylated tristeryl phenol, ethoxylated tristeryl phenol phosphates,ethoxylated and ethopropoxylated castor oil, calcium alkyl benzenesulfonates and proprietary blended emulsifiers. However, those skilledin the art will appreciate that it is possible to utilize otheremulsifiers known in the art without departing from the scope of theinvention.

Fillers which can be commonly used include diatomaceous earth, kaolin,bentonite, precipitated silica, attapulgite, and perlite. However, thoseskilled in the art will appreciate that it is possible to utilize otheremulsifiers known in the art without departing from the scope of theinvention.

Diluents which can be commonly used include one or more of tone calcite,mica, soap powder, dolomite and lactose. However, those skilled in theart will appreciate that it is possible to utilize other diluents knownin the art without departing from the scope of the invention.

Solvents which can be commonly used include one or more of N,N-dimethyldecanamide, N-methyl pyrrolidone, cyclohexanone, dimethyl formamide,tetrahydrofuran, dimethylsulfoxide, petroleum distillates andchlorobenzenes. However, those skilled in the art will appreciate thatit is possible to utilize other solvents known in the art withoutdeparting from the scope of the invention.

The compositions comprising sulphur and an insecticide can be preparedby various processes.

Water dispersible granule compositions can be made by various processessuch as spray drying, fluid bed spray granulation, extrusion, pangranulation, etc. One way of making water dispersible granularcompositions which include sulphur and the insecticide, involvesinitially blending required additives such as wetting agents, dispersingagents, emulsifiers, solvents, fillers to obtain an additive mix. Theadditive mix obtained is dispersed in sufficient quantity of water toform a blend. A requisite amount of insecticide technical and sulphurtechnical are slowly added to the blend by high shear mixing. Furtheragrochemically acceptable excipients such as fillers can be added, ifrequired to form a mixture. The above mixture is wet milled using a beadmill to obtain an average particle size of less than 50 microns,preferably less than 15 microns, preferably 1 to 10 microns to obtainthe mill base. The mill base is granulated in an appropriate spray drieror other drying methods with an outlet of a suitable temperaturefollowed by sieving to remove the under sized and oversized granules, toobtain a WG formulation comprising sulphur and insecticide incombination.

Alternately stable aqueous suspension concentrates compositions ofsulphur and the insecticide may be prepared by blending requiredadditives such as wetting agents, dispersing agents, emulsifiers,fillers to obtain an additive mix. Then a mill base having an averageparticle size of less than 50 microns, preferably less than 15 microns,preferably 1 to 10 microns is prepared by milling a mixture of requisiteamount of the insecticide and sulphur technical in appropriate ratios inadditive mix in required amount of water containing solvent. Further,sufficient quantity of water with required amounts of binders andpreservatives is added to the mill base and mixed thoroughly to get theSC formulations of the desired combination of sulphur and theinsecticide.

Alternately, wettable powder compositions of sulphur and a solidinsecticide can be prepared by blending required additives such aswetting agents, dispersing agents, emulsifiers, fillers to obtain anadditive mix. Further essential amount of sulphur and insecticidetechnical are blended thoroughly with appropriate weight of additivemix, carrier and the required amount of filler. The mixture is thenmicronised using a suitable mill like fluid energy mill, jet mill, pinmill, hammer mill to an average particle size of less than 50 microns,preferably less than 15 microns, preferably 4 to 10 microns to get theWP formulation comprising sulphur and insecticide in combination.

The wettable powder compositions of sulphur and liquid insecticide canbe prepared by blending required additives such as wetting agents,dispersing agents, emulsifiers, fillers to obtain an additive mix. Anessential quantity of sulphur technical, additive mix and optionally afiller are blended together and are then micronized using a suitablemill like fluid energy mill to an average particle size of less than 50microns, preferably less than 15 microns, preferably 4 to 10 microns toobtain a sulphur base. The requisite amount of liquid pesticide is thenabsorbed on to carrier to obtain an insecticide base. The proportionateamount of the insecticide base and the sulphur base are blendedthoroughly to get the WP formulation.

Alternately, emulsifiable concentrate (EC) compositions can be preparedby dissolving required quantity of the insecticide in a solvent toobtain a solution. A blend of non ionic and an anionic emulsifier areadded to the solution to obtain the EC of the insecticide.

The compositions of the invention can also be in the form of a ZC whichcan be prepared by initially preparing a suspension concentrate (SC) ofa first active and a capsulated suspension (CS) of a second active, andthen mixing the SC and CS. The SC can be prepared by methods describedearlier in the application. CS formulation of the insecticide isprepared separately by emulsifying the required amount of liquid ormolten insecticide with or without a solvent along with requisite amountadditives such as monomers, emulsifiers, dispersing agents at ambient orelevated temperature with or without catalysts.

Alternatively, compositions comprising sulphur and insecticides in theform of a gel can be prepared by mixing the required quantity of sulphursuspension as prepared above with additives like feed stimulants such asdextrose along with requisite amounts of attractants, flavors, feedstimulants, gelling agents and activators for gelling.

According to an embodiment, the invention relates to a method ofapplication of an effective amount of the pesticidal composition,wherein the composition is applied to crops through foliar spray or soilapplication or through drip irrigation or trickle irrigation.

Through the agrochemical compositions, it has been observed that thenumber of applications to control wide range of pests appearing at thesame time is minimized. The compositions are highly safe to the user andto the environment. The compositions are also cost-effective, as theyprovide much greater simultaneous control and can be used in a varietyof crops with a broader spectrum of protection improved and healthyfoliage, rainfastedness, improved crop yield, better grain quality. Thepesticidal compositions in practice also serve the purpose ofsimultaneously managing the damage caused by termites found in samemedium (soil) and meeting the need of sulphur fertilizer required in theinitial stages of plant growth. The compositions are thereby renderedhighly economical and beneficial to the end-users when compared to thestandalone compositions of the insecticide and sulphur. Also, thecompositions serve as an intervention application between very specificactives likely to lead to resistance in areas of epidemic and highfrequency of pesticidal applications.

EXAMPLES Example 1 Sulphur 65%+Buprofezin 14% WG

Step 1: Preparation of ‘additive mix’. 25 parts of Sodium salt ofnaphthalene sulfonate condensate (eg. Tamol NN 8906), 25 parts of Sodiumsalt of phenol sulfonate condensate (eg. Tamol PP), 100 parts of Sodiumlignin sulfonate (eg. Reax 100M) and 50 parts of Kaolin (eg. Bardenclay) are blended together and used as ‘additive mix’.

Step 2: Preparation of mill base. 18 parts of ‘additive mix’ is firstdispersed in 100 parts of water. Added slowly 15 parts of Buprofezintechnical (95% purity) and 67 parts of sulphur technical (99% purity)under high shear mixing. The mixture is wet milled using a bead mill toan average particle size of around 2 microns to get the mill base.

Step 3: Spray granulation of mill base. The above mill base is spraygranulated in an appropriate spray drier with an out let temperaturearound 70 degree C. followed by sieving to remove the under sized andoversized, to get Sulphur 65%+Buprofezin 14% WG.

Example 2 Sulphur 50%+Diafenthiuron 35% WG

Mill base prepared by milling a mixture of 36 parts of Difenthiurontechnical (95% purity), 51.5 parts of sulphur technical (99% purity),12.5 parts of ‘additive mix’ in 100 parts of water is spray granulatedas in Example 1 to get Sulphur 50%+Difenthiuron 35% WG.

Example 3 Sulphur 85%+Fipronil 0.4% WG

Mill base prepared by milling a mixture of 0.5 part of Fiproniltechnical (96% purity), 87 parts of sulphur technical (99% purity), 12.5parts of ‘additive mix’ in 100 parts of water is spray granulated as inExample 1 to get Sulphur 85%+Fipronil 0.4% WG.

Example 4 Sulphur 40%+Thiamethoxam 2% SC

Mill base, having an average particle size of around 2 microns, isprepared as in Example 1 by milling a mixture of 2.3 parts ofThiamethoxam (98% purity), 41.5 parts of sulphur technical (99% purity),10 parts of ‘additive mix’ in 37.7parts of water containing 5 parts ofpropylene glycol. 8.5 parts of 2% dispersion of xanthum gum (eg.Rhodopol) in water containing 0.5% 1,2-Benzisothiazolin-3-one (eg.Proxel) is then added to the mill base and mixed thoroughly to getSulphur 40%+Thiamethoxam 2% SC.

Example 5 Sulphur+Cartap (WP)

Sulphur and cartap hydrochloride are micronized by suitable millingequipment, below 75 microns, preferably below 15 microns, and themicronized powder of the active ingredients thus obtained can be blendedin a closed environment with the excipients in the right proportions toachieve the desired composition. The blended actives and excipients canalso be compacted through a compactor, a pelletizer or pastillator orpan granulated to form granules.

Efficacy Trials

The efficacy trials conducted using stand-alone treatments of sulphurand the insecticides were done in accordance with the standardrecommended dosages for these active ingredients in India. However, itmay be noted that the recommended dosages for each active ingredient mayvary as per recommendations in a particular country, soil conditions,weather conditions and disease incidence.

Example 1 Bioefficacy of Sulphur+Cartap granules

The trials were conducted in Kamal district of Haryana state in India onpaddy, to evaluate the effectiveness of sulphur plus cartap granules invarious combinations. The experiments were also conducted using Sulphur90% WG standalone and Cartap Hydrochloride 4% Granules standalone usedas standards for comparison as well as an untreated control. Thetreatments were carried out following the randomized block design andkeeping all the agronomic practices uniform for all the treatments. Itis to be noted that the larvae of Scirpophaga incertulas Walker causedead hearts during vegetative stage and white ear heads duringreproductive stage. Even though rice plant can compensate if dead heartinfestation does not exceed 10 percent, it cannot compensate for thewhite ear loss.

The treatments were carried out by broadcasting the compositions twicethe on 30th and the 60th days after transplanting of the paddy. Both theapplications and their efficacy were evaluated. To avoid intermixing oftreatments, about 20 to 30 em thick false bund boundaries were preparedall around plots having the treatments of granular insecticides.

The treatments applied were as indicated in the table below:

TABLE 1A Formulation Percent dead heart Active ingredient dosage in perhill White ear Treatment Composition (grams/hectare) gm/ha 50DAT 175 DAThead (%) 1 Sulphur 90% + 13500 + 337 15000 3.20 3.68 5.31 Cartap 2.25%WP 2 Sulphur 70% + 10500 + 600 15000 2.70 2.37 3.5 Cartap Hydrochloride4% WP 3 Sulphur 60% +  9000 + 900 15000 2.48 2.15 3.24 CartapHydrochloride 6% WP 4 Sulphur 50% +  7500 + 1125 20000 3.15 2.86 4.62Cartap Hydrochloride 7.5% WP 5 Sulphur 90% WG 6750 7500 6.86 5.42 10.546 Cartap Hyrochloride  750 18750 2.21 2.42 3.23 4% Granules 7 Untreatedcheck — — 12 10.64 14.36

It was noted that the application of Sulphur 60%+Cartap Hydrochloride 6%WP at 9000+900 g.a.i. per hectare (Treatment 3) provided better controlover the population of stem borer at 75 days after transplanting incomparison to cartap (Treatment 6).

Apart from controlling the larvae of Scirpophaga incertulas, thecombined product of sulphur+Cartap Hydrochloride in varyingconcentrations also displayed a valuable impact on the physiologicalfactors like improved foliage (greenness) in paddy and an increase inthe number of tillers, contributing to higher yield.

Below is a tabular presentation of the yield indicating the number oftillers at 60 DAT (days after transplanting):

TABLE 1B Active Number of tillers ingredient (Mean of randomly TreatmentComposition (grams/hectare) selected 5 plants) 1 Sulphur 90% + 13500 +337 6.95 Cartap Hydrochloride 2.25% WP 2 Sulphur 70% + 10500 + 600 6.46Cartap hydrochloride 4% WP 3 Sulphur 60% +  9000 + 900 6.27 CartapHydrochloride 6% WP 4 Sulphur 50% +  7500 + 1125 5.78 CartapHydrochloride 7.5% WP 5 Sulphur 90% WG 6750 5.27 6 Cartap Hydrochloride 750 4.78 4% Granules

The maximum numbers of tillers were observed with the application ofSulphur 90%+Cartap Hydrochloride 2.25% WP at 13500+337 g.a.i. perhectare (Treatment 1). The application of Sulphur 70%+cartaphydrochloride 4% WP at 10500+600 g.a.i. per hectare (Treatment 2) alsoshowed a significant increase in the number of tillers observed.

This increase in the number of tillers as compared to the individualapplication of Cartap hydrochloride 4% Granules (Treatment 6) is due tothe presence of sulphur in the composition. The crops also exhibitedenhanced chlorophyll content due to the application of sulphur incombination with cartap in varying concentrations.

The above composition in practice serves the purpose of simultaneouslymanaging the damage caused by stem borer and the need of sulphurfertilizer required in the initial stages of plant growth, therebyrendering the composition more economical and beneficial to theend-users when compared to the individual application of Cartap orSulphur.

The above composition also restricts the undue loading of a carrier suchas sand which is present upto the extent of 90% in standalone Cartapcomposition which is actually a waste.

Example 2A Bioefficacy of Sulphur+Fipronil WG

The treatments were carried out during kharif in Akola district ofMaharashtra in India on cotton in a plot size of 5.4×5.4 sq·m with aspacing of 90×60 em. The experiments were configured with ninetreatments which were replicated four times. The crop was raisedfollowing all standard agronomical practices in a randomized blockdesign condition. The treatments were imposed as and when a significantnumber of sucking pests such as nymphs of jassids, nymphs/adults ofthrips or aphids per leaf were observed. All the agronomic practiceswere adopted as per recommendations.

The populations of sucking pests viz., thrips, aphids and leafhopperswere recorded from randomly selected ten plants. A day before theimposition of treatment, the populations of sucking pest were found tobe quite uniform and above the economic threshold level.

The below table shows the details of the treatments applied and the pestpopulation after the 5th day of spraying:

TABLE 2A Active Formulation ingredients Dosage in Day No. of No. of No.of No. of No. of (grams/ grams/ Before thrips/ Jassid/ Aphids/3 mites/Predator/ Treatment Composition hectare) hectare spray 3 leaves 3 leavesleaves 1 leaf plant 1 Sulphur 1275 + 150 1500 43 9 12 1 2 3 85% +Fipronil 10% WG 2 Sulphur 1275 + 105 1500 40 7 16 3 4 3 85% + Fipronil7% WG 3 Sulphur 1200 + 90  1500 41 9 19 7 7 3 80% + Fipronil 6% WG 4Sulphur 1200 + 75  1500 45 13 22 8 7 2 (80%) + Fipronil (5%) WG 5Sulphur 637.5 + 52.5 1500 43 10 19 7 5 2 42.5% + Fipronil 3.5% SC 6Sulphur   600 + 37.5 1500 49 19 27 10 8 3 40% + Fipronil 2.5% SC 7Sulphur 1200 1500 45 34 38 29 8 2 80% WG 8 Fipronil 5%  80 1500 42 14 215 17 2 SC 9 Untreated — 45 48 51 50 49 3 check

It was observed that the application of Sulphur 85%+Fipronil 10% WG at1275 +150 g.a.i per hectare (Treatment 1) was highly effective incontrolling the sucking pest.

The application of Sulphur 85%+Fipronil 7% WG at 1275+105 g.a.i perhectare (Treatment 2) was found effective in controlling the pest ascompared to individual application of Sulphur 80% WG (Treatment 7) andFipronil5% SC (Treatment 8).

It was also noticed that the SC formulation Sulphur 42.5%+Fipronil 3.5%SC at 637.5+52.5 g.a.i per hectare (Treatment 5) showed a good efficacyover the population of thrips, mites, jassid and aphids and bettercontrol of the pest population for a longer period of time as comparedto Treatment 7 and Treatment 8 with the individual actives at higherconcentrations.

Example 2B Bioefficacy of Sulphur+Fipronil Granule

The treatments were conducted in Lucknow district of Uttar Pradesh Statein India on sugarcane following a randomized block treatment with seventreatments and four replications. Each treatment had 25 suckers plantedin a row and the whole application of all the treatments was carried outon the 35th and 65th day after planting. All the agronomic practiceswere adopted as per recommendations.

The treatments included combinations of Sulphur+fipronil with varyingconcentration of the active ingredients, Sulphur 80% WG stand alone andFipronil 0.3% granules stand alone use as standards for comparison alongwith an untreated control were evaluated against sugarcane shoot borer,Chilo infuscatellus Snellen and root borer. Emmalocera depressellaSwinhoe. The treatments were applied as indicated in the table below:

TABLE 2B Mean percentage of affected plants with Formulation shoot borerand root Active ingredients Dosage in borer (randomly TreatmentComposition (grams/hectare) grams/hectare selected 25 plant) Yield(ton/ha) 1 Sulphur 13500 + 45 15000 3.78 95 90% + Fipronil 0.3 2 Sulphur80% + 12000 + 75 15000 2.57 98 Fipronil 0.5% Granules 3 Sulphur 70% + 10500 + 105 15000 1.85 101 Fipronil 0.7% Granules 4 Sulphur 60% + 9000 + 150 15000 1.32 103 Fipronil 1% Granules 5 Sulphur 90% 6750 75008.59 95 WG 6 Fipronil 0.3%  100 25000 3.6 98 Granules 7 Untreated check— — 14.57 70

It was observed that the application of Sulphur 70%+Fipronil 0.7%Granules at 10500+105 g.a.i per hectare (Treatment 3) and Sulphur60%+Fipronil 1% Granules. at 9000+150 g.a.i per hectare (Treatment 4)were found superior in controlling the shoot borer and root borerpopulation as compared to individual application of Sulphur 90% WG(Treatment 5) and Fipronil 0.3% Granules (Treatment 6).

The physiological and nutritional behavior of sulphur were alsoevaluated and noticed by randomly selecting 25 cane plant and countingthe nodes/internodes and the circumference of the cane to know thethickness of cane as illustrated in the Table below:

TABLE 2C Number of internodes Thickness of cane Active Formulation percane (mean of 25 (in em) (mean of 25 ingredients Dosage in randomlyrandomly Treatment Composition (grams/hectare) grams/hectare selectedcanes) selected canes) 1 Sulphur 90% + 13500 + 45  15000 14.75 17.27Fipronil 0.3% 2 Sulphur 80% + 12000 + 75  15000 13.47 17.03 Fipronil0.5% Granules 3 Sulphur 70% + 10500 + 105  15000 13.26 16.69 Fipronil0.7% Granules 4 Sulphur 60% + 9000 + 150 15000 13.22 16.44 Fipronil 1%Granules 5 Sulphur 50 + 7500 + 180 15000 12.73 15.78 Fipronil 1.2%Granules 6 Sulphur 90% 6750 7500 8.59 14 WG 7 Fipronil 0.3%  100 250007.00 13.5 Granule 8 Untreated — — 12.46 15.32 check

It was also observed that applications of fipronil and sulphur incombination not only provided good control over the pest population butalso significantly increased the yield which was noted in terms ofthickness and girth of the cane and an increase in the height as well asthe length internodes of sugarcane as compared to the individualtreatment with fipronil used alone.

The above composition serves a dual purpose of simultaneously managingthe damage caused by shoot borer and meeting the fertilizer requirementin the initial stages of plant growth with the presence of sulphur inthe composition. The composition is thereby more economical andbeneficial to the end-users when compared with the present practices ofsolo application of fipronil granules and sulphur fertilizer that savesnot only the additional labor but also the vital cost of solo Sulphurfertilizer.

The above composition also restricts the undue loading of a carrier suchas sand which is present up to the extent of 90% in standalone FipronilGranule composition.

Example 3 Bioefficacy for Sulphur+Pirimicarb

The field trials were carried out in the Rajkot district of Gujaratstate in India on cotton following a randomized block design with fourreplications and eight treatments with a plot size of 3.6×6.0 m. Thevarieties viz., Bt cotton, CV Vikram-5, were transplanted inexperimental fields. All the agronomic practices were adopted as perrecommendations.

The treatments included combinations of Sulphur plus Pirimicarb withvarying concentration of the active ingredients, Sulphur 80% WG standalone and Pirimicarb 50% WG stand alone used as standards for comparisonalong with an untreated control.

The treatments were carried out after the development of sufficientpopulation of aphid and mites on plants after 20-25 days oftransplanting. Five plants were selected randomly in each plot andtagged. On each plant, three twigs selected randomly were observedcritically for the mites and the number of aphids and mites were countedbefore as well as after the 3rd, 7th, 10th and 15th days of eachspraying.

The treatments were applied were as indicated in the table below:

TABLE 3 Average no. of Average no. of Active Formulationaphids/twig/plant in mites/twig/plant in ingredients Dosage particularperiod particular period (grams/ in grams/ Before 3rd 7th 10th 15thBefore 3rd 7th 10th 15th Treatment Composition hectare) hectare sprayDAS DAS DAS DAS spray DAS DAS DAS DAS 1 Sulphur 60% +  900 + 200 1500 6820 3 0 0 55 13 6 0 0 Pirimicarb 13% WDG 2 Sulphur 70% + 1050 + 135 150072 25 7 2 0 69 18 8 3 0 Pirimicarb 9% WDG 3 Sulphur 75% + 1125 + 75 1500 60 28 18 12 11 49 12 4 0 0 Pirimicarb 5% WDG 4 Sulphur 562.5 + 45  1500 55 22 17 0 0 62 16 3 0 0 37.5% + Pirimicarb 3% SC 5 Sulphur 30% +  450 + 37.5 1500 52 37 19 11 21 58 28 23 16 24 Pirimicarb 2.5% SC 6Sulphur 80% 1250 1500 48 42 40 40 37 60 15 6 3 0 WG 7 Pirimicarb  125250 46 22 12 8 7 47 32 18 16 14 50% WG 8 Untreated — — 62 69 64 70 66 5860 65 62 70 check

It was observed that the application of Sulphur 60%+Pirimicarb 13% WDGat 900+200 a.i per ha (Treatment 1) was found to be highly effective incontrolling the pest population after the 3rd, 7th, 10th and 15th daysafter spraying as compared to individual application of Sulphur 80% WG(Treatment 6) and Pirimicarb 50% WG (Treatment 7) used at a much higherconcentration of actives.

It was also found that the combinations of Sulphur+Pirimicarb(Treatments 1 to 5) were highly effective against the mite population incomparison to the individual application of Pirimicarb (Treatment 7) ata higher concentration.

It was also noticed that the SC formulation of Sulphur 37.5%+Pirimicarb3% SC at 562.5+45 g.a.i. per ha (Treatment 4) showed a good efficacyover the population of aphids and mites and an enhanced control of thepest population for a longer period of time, as compared to Treatment 6and Treatment 7 with individual actives at higher concentrations.

Further, the presence of sulphur exihibited an enhanced flowering andboll formation as compared to the treatment with individual actives.

Example 4 Bioefficacy of Sulphur+Buprofezin

The trials were carried out in the Rajkot district of Gujarat in Indiaon Bt cotton, CV Vikram-5 following a Randomized block design with fourreplications and ten treatments with a plot size of 3.6×6.0 m. Thespacing followed was 0.9×0.6 m between rows and plants, respectively.All the agronomic practices were adopted as per recommendations.

The treatments were carried out with after a sufficient population ofmealy bugs was developed on the plants after 40-45 days of planting.Five plants were selected randomly in each plot and tagged. On eachplant, three twigs (each 10 em. long) selected randomly were observedcritically using magnifying lens for the mites and the number of mealybugs and mites were counted before as well as after the 3rd, 7th, 10thand 15th days of each spraying.

The treatments included combinations of Sulphur plus Buprofezin withvarying concentration of the active ingredients, Sulphur 80% WG standalone and Buprofezin 25% SC stand alone use as standards for comparisonalong with an untreated control.

The treatments were applied were as indicated in the table below:

TABLE 4 Average no. of mealy Average no. of Active Formulationbugs/twig/plant in mites/twig/plant in ingredients Dosage particularperiod particular period (grams/ in grams/ Before 3rd 7th 10th 15thBefore 3rd 7th 10th 15th Treatment Composition hectare) hectare sprayDAS DAS DAS DAS spray DAS DAS DAS DAS 1 Sulphur 40% +  600 + 375 1500 5728 10 4 1 56 40 12 5 4 Buprofezin 25% WDG 2 Sulphur 50% +  750 + 2551500 62 38 13 7 3 49 37 14 6 2 Buprofezin 17% WDG 3 Sulphur 60% +  900 +210 1500 68 20 3 0 0 55 10 4 0 0 Buprofezin 14% WDG 4 Sulphur 70% +1050 + 180 1500 72 25 7 2 0 69 18 8 3 0 Buprofezin 12% WDG 5 Sulphur75% + 1125 + 150 1500 60 28 12 5 2 49 12 4 0 0 Buprofezin 10% WDG 6Sulphur 37.5 + 562.5 + 105  1500 55 22 4 0 0 62 16 3 0 0 Buprofezin 7%SC 7 Sulphur 30% + 450 + 75 1500 58 32 12 8 3 62 22 9 5 3 Buprofezin 5%SC 8 Sulphur 80% 1250 1500 48 40 38 40 37 60 15 6 3 0 WG 9 Buprofezin25%  250 1000 46 23 7 3 0 47 32 18 9 11 SC 10 Untreated — — 62 69 64 7066 58 60 65 62 70 check

It was observed that application of Sulphur 60%+Buprofezin 14% WDG at900+210 g.a.i. per ha (Treatment 3) proved to be effective by providingsufficient and good control over mealy bugs as well as the mite afterthe 3rd, 7th, 10th and 15th days of each spraying at reducedconcentration of the active ingredients as compared to individualapplication of Sulphur 80% WG (Treatment 8) and Buprofezin 25% SC(Treatment 9) used at a much higher concentration of actives thusindicating the synergistic effect in managing the mite population.

It was found that Sulphur 70%+Buprofezin 12% WDG at 1050+180 g.a.i. perha (Treatment 4) and Sulphur 75%+Buprofezin 10% WDG at 1125+150 g.a.i.per ha (Treatment 5) provide an increased control as compared toBuprofezin 25% SC standalone treatment (Treatment 9) at a higherconcentration of the active ingredients.

It was also observed that the SC formulation of Sulphur37.5%+Buprofezin7% SC at 562.5+105 g.a.i per hectare (Treatment 6)exhibited a better efficacy over the population of mealy bugs and mitesas compared to Treatment 8 and Treatment 9 with individual actives athigher concentrations.

The presence of sulphur in the composition exhibited crops with animproved foliage (more greenish leaves and a clearly opened leaflamina), thus helping in maximizing square formation and retention offlowers at a critical stage and ultimately leading to high yields.

Example 5 Bioefficacy of Sulphur+Thiacloprid

The field experiments were carried out on Cotton in the Akola districtof Maharashtra state in India. The experiments were configured witheight treatments which were replicated four times. Cotton hybrid RCH-2Btwas sown in a plot size of 5.4×5.4 sq·m with a spacing of 90×60 em. Thecrop was raised following all standard agronomical practices inRandomized Block Design conditions.

The populations of sucking pests viz., thrips, aphids and leafhopperswere recorded from randomly selected ten plants. A day before theimposition of treatment, populations of sucking pest were found to bequite uniform and above the economic threshold level.

The treatments included combinations of Sulphur+thiacloprid with varyingconcentration of the active ingredients, Sulphur 80% WG stand alone andThiacloprid 50% WG stand alone use as standards for comparison alongwith an untreated control. The treatments were applied as indicated inthe table below:

TABLE 5 Active Formulation ingredients Dosage in Day No. of No. of No.of No. of No. of (grams/ grams/ Before thrips/ Jassid/ Aphids/ mites/Predator/ Treatment Composition hectare) hectare spray 3 leaves 3 leaves3 leaves 3 leaves plant 1 Sulphur 60% +  900 + 225 1500 40 7 16 3 4 3Thiacloprid 15% WG 2 Sulphur 70% + 1050 + 105 1500 41 9 19 7 0 3Thiacloprid 7% WG 3 Sulphur 75% + 1125 + 90  1500 45 13 22 6 0 2Thiacloprid 6% WG 4 Sulphur 37.5% + 562.5 + 60   1500 43 10 12 4 3 3Thiacloprid 4% SC 5 Sulphur 30% + 450 + 45 1500 47 19 16 18 5 1Thiacloprid 3% SC 6 Sulphur 80% 1250 1500 45 34 38 29 8 2 WG 7Thiacloprid  125 250 42 14 21 5 17 2 50% WG 8 Untreated — — 45 48 51 5049 3 check

It was observed that application of Sulphur 60%+Thiacloprid 15% WG at900+225 g.a.i per hectare (Treatment 1) proved to be very effective incontrolling the sucking pests.

The application of Sulphur 70%+Thiacloprid 7% WG at 1050+105 g.a.i perhectare (Treatment 2) was also very effective in controlling the pest ascompared to individual application of Sulphur 80% WG (Treatment 6) andThiacloprid 50% WG (Treatment 7) used at a much higher concentration ofactives, where high damage is observed because of mites.

In case of SC formulation application of Sulphur 37.5%+Thiacloprid 4% SCat 562.5+45 g.a.i per hectare (Treatment 4) showed better efficacy overthe population of thrips, aphids, jassid and mites and the bettercontrol of pest population for a longer period of time as compared toTreatment 6 and Treatment 7 with individual actives at higherconcentrations.

The population of thrips, jassids and aphids was counted after the 5thday after spraying and it was found that the compositions containingcombinations of Sulphur and Thiacloprid was quite effective over suckingpest complex as compared to the insecticide used alone, thus proving adistinct advantage of managing broader spectrum of sucking pests andmites, simultaneously that occurs in nature, on other crop plants ofeconomical importance including fruits and vegetables.

Example 6 Bioefficacy of Sulphur+Acetamiprid

The trials were carried out in Bhatinda district of Punjab state inIndia on cotton cultivar RCH-2 following a randomized block design withfour replications and nine treatments on a plot size of 3.6×6.0 m. Allthe agronomic practices were adopted as per recommendations.

The treatments were carried out after development of sufficientpopulation of white fly and mites on plants after 20-25 days oftransplanting. Five plants were selected randomly in each plot andtagged. On each plant, three twigs selected randomly were observedcritically using magnifying lens (for mites) and the number of whiteflies and mites were counted before as well as after the 3rd, 7th, 10thand 15th days of spraying.

The treatments included combinations of Sulphur+Acetamiprid with varyingconcentration of the active ingredients, Sulphur 80% WG stand alone andAcetamiprid 20% SP stand alone use as standards for comparison alongwith an untreated control. The treatments were applied as indicated inthe table below:

TABLE 6 Average no. of white Active Formulation fly/twig/plant inAverage no. of mite/twig/plant ingredients Dosage particular period inparticular period (grams/ in grams/ Before 3rd 7th 10th 15th Before 3rd7th 10th 15th Treatment Composition hectare) hectare spray DAS DAS DASDAS spray DAS DAS DAS DAS 1 Sulphur 70% + 1050 + 45  1500 68 20 3 0 0 5513 6 0 0 Acetamiprid 3% WDG 2 Sulphur 75% + 1125 + 30  1500 72 25 7 2 069 18 8 3 0 Acetamiprid 2% WDG 3 Sulphur 80% +  1200 + 22.5 1500 60 2820 18 20 49 12 4 0 0 Acetamiprid 1.5% WDG 4 Sulphur 50% +  750 + 7.51500 51 38 24 33 38 43 21 13 7 12 Acetamiprid 0.5% WDG 5 Sulphur40% +  600 + 22.5 1500 55 22 20 10 8 62 16 3 0 0 Acetamiprid 1.5% SE 6Sulphur35% +   525 + 11.25 1500 42 18 15 13 13 52 24 13 7 9 Acetamiprid0.75% SE 7 Sulphur 80% 1250 1500 48 40 38 40 37 60 15 6 3 0 WG 8Acetamiprid  20 100 46 30 15 18 20 47 32 18 9 11 20% SP 9 Untreated — —62 69 64 70 66 58 60 65 62 70 check

It was observed that the applications of Sulphur 70%+Acetamiprid 3% WDGat 1050+4 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 1) was found to be very effective incontrolling the white fly population and found superior after the 3rd,7th, 10th and 15th days of spraying as compared to the individualapplication of Sulphur 80% WG (Treatment 7) and Acetamiprid 20% SP(Treatment 8). The quick knock down effect of mites was observedsignificantly in Treatment 1 because of presence of Sulphur in thecomposition.

It was also noticed that theSE formulation Sulphur 40%+Acetamiprid 1.5%SC at 600+22.5 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 5) showed a better efficacy overthe population of white fly and mites and good control up to the 10thday of spraying despite being used at very low dosages of the individualactive ingredients, especially Sulphur.

It was observed that the combination of Sulphur+Acetamiprid, were highlyeffective against the white flies and mite population as compared toTreatment 7 and Treatment 8 with individual actives at higherconcentrations.

Further, the presence of sulphur exihibited an enhanced flowering andboll formation as compared to treatment with individual actives.

Example 7 Bioefficacy of Sulphur+Clothianidin

The trials were carried out in Akola district of Maharashtra state inIndia on cotton. The experiments were configured with eleven treatmentswhich were replicated four times. Cotton hybrid RCH-2Bt was sown in aplot size of 5.4×5.4 sq·m with a spacing of 90×60 em. The crop wasraised following all standard agronomical practices in Randomized BlockDesign with eleven treatments which were replicated four times. Thetreatments were carried out after sizeable population of jassids,thrips, aphids were observed.

The populations of sucking pests viz., thrips, aphids and leafhopperswere recorded from randomly selected ten plants. A day before theimposition of treatment, population of sucking pest was quite uniformand above the economic threshold level.

The treatments included combinations of Sulphur+Clothianidin withvarying concentration of the active ingredients, Sulphur 80% WG standalone and Clothianidin 50% WG stand alone use as standards forcomparison along with an untreated control. The treatments were appliedas indicated in the table below.

The below table shows the live pest population after the 10th day ofspraying and it was observed that the combination ofsulphur+clothianidin was effective to give sufficient control up to 15thday of spraying:

TABLE 7 Active Formulation ingredients Dosage in Day No. of No. of No.of No. of No. of (grams/ grams/ Before thrips/ Jassid/ Aphids/ mites/Predators/ Treatment Composition hectare) hectare spray 3 leaves 3leaves 3 leaves 3 leaves plant 1 Sulphur 60% + 900 + 45 1500 52 3 7 0 102 Clothianidin 3% WG 2 Sulphur 50% +   750 + 37.5 1500 44 4 9 0 13 3Clothianidin 2.5% WG 3 Sulphur 60% + 900 + 30 1500 40 7 16 2 9 3Clothianidin 2% WG 4 Sulphur 70% +  1050 + 22.5 1500 41 5 13 0 3 3Clothianidin 1.5% WG 5 Sulphur 80% + 1200 + 15  1500 45 13 22 8 7 2Clothianidin 1% WG 6 Sulphur 80% +  1200 + 7.5  1500 43 15 21 9 5 3Clothianidin 0.5% WG 7 Sulphur 40% +   600 + 22.5 1500 43 10 19 7 5 2Clothianidin 1.5% SC 8 Sulphur 25% +   375 + 3.75 1500 43 22 28 13 27 3Clothianidin 0.25% SC 9 Sulphur 80% WG 1200 1500 45 34 38 29 8 2 10Clothianidin 50%  25 50 42 12 18 4 17 2 WDG 11 Untreated check — — 45 4851 50 49 3

The population of thrips, jassid, aphid and mites (mite population werecounted with the help of stereoscopic microscope) and Predator wascounted after the 5th day after spraying.

It was found that the application of Sulphur 60%+Clothianidin 3% WG at900+45 g.a.i. per ha (Treatment 1) was the highly effective incontrolling the sucking pest complex. The application of Sulphur70%+Clothianidin 1.5% WG at 1050+22.5 a.i gm per hectare (Treatment 4)was also found to be good in controlling the sucking pests as comparedto the individual application of Sulphur 80% WG (Treatment 9) andClothianidin 50% WDG (Treatment 10) used at a much higher concentrationof actives.

In the case of SC compositions, it was observed that application ofSulphur 40%+Clothianidin 1.5% SC at 600+22.5 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 7)showed better efficacy over the population of thrip, aphid, jassid andmites and the better control of pest population up to longer period oftime as compared to Treatment 9 and Treatment 10 with individual activesat higher concentrations.

All the treatments were proved to be safer for Predators and parasitesas the number of Coccinellids (grubs and adults)+grubs of Chrysoperlacarnea were found safer in all the treatments.

Example 8 Bioefficacy of Sulphur+Diafenthiuron

The treatments were carried out in Rajkot district of Gujarat state inIndia on cotton following a randomized block design with fourreplications and twelve treatments with a plot size of 3.6×6.0 m. Allthe agronomic practices were adopted as per recommendations.

The treatments were carried out after development of sufficientpopulation of white fly and mites on plants after 20-25 days of sowing.Five plants were selected randomly in each plot and tagged. On eachplant, three twigs selected randomly were observed critically usingmagnifying lens (for mites) and the number of white flies and mites werecounted before as well as after the 3rd, 7th, 10th and 15th days ofspraying.

The treatments included combinations of Sulphur+Diafenthiuron withvarying concentration of the active ingredients, Sulphur 80% WG standalone and Diafenthiuron 50% WP stand-alone use as standards forcomparison along with an untreated control. The treatments were appliedas indicated in the table below.

TABLE 8 Average no. of white Active Formulation fly/twig/plant inAverage no. of mite/twig/plant ingredients Dosage in particular periodin particular period (grams/ grams/ Before 3rd 7th 10th 15th Before 3rd7th 10th 15th Treatment Composition hectare) hectare spray DAS DAS DASDAS spray DAS DAS DAS DAS 1 Sulphur 40% + 600 + 600 1500 58 13 4 0 0 5642 21 20 22 Diafenthiuron 40% WDG 2 Sulphur 40% + 600 + 525 1500 51 18 30 0 50 38 14 19 24 Diafenthiuron 35% WDG 3 Sulphur 55% + 825 + 450 150058 32 5 0 0 55 29 12 6 10 Diafenthiuron 30% WDG 4 Sulphur 60% + 900 +375 1500 72 25 7 3 2 69 32 8 3 0 Diafenthiuron 25% WDG 5 Sulphur 70% +1050 + 300  1500 55 22 15 5 8 62 16 3 0 0 Diafenthiuron 20% WDG 6Sulphur 75% + 1125 + 225  1500 55 22 15 5 12 62 16 3 0 0 Diafenthiuron15% WDG 7 Sulphur 70% + 1050 + 180  1500 61 39 30 21 28 53 28 12 7 5Diafenthiuron 12% WDG 8 Sulphur 37.5% + 562.5 + 262.5 1500 55 12 4 0 052 16 3 0 0 Diafenthiuron 17.5% SC 9 Sulphur 20% +   300 + 112.5 1500 5522 15 18 28 62 16 8 5 10 Diafenthiuron 7.5% SC 10 Sulphur80% 1250 150048 40 38 40 37 60 15 6 3 0 WG 11 Diafenthiuron 300 600 46 18 7 4 7 47 3218 9 11 50% WP 12 Untreated check — — 62 69 64 70 66 58 60 65 62 70

It was observed that the applications of Sulphur 55%+Diafenthiuron 30%WDG at 825+450 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 3), Sulphur 60%+Diafenthiuron 25%WDG at 900+375 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 4) and Sulphur 70%+Diafenthiuron20% WDG at 1050+300 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 5) were found to be highlyeffective in controlling the white fly population at lower concentrationafter the 3rd, 7th, 10th and 15th days of spraying as compared to theindividual application of Sulphur 80% WG (Treatment 10) andDiafenthiuron 50% WP (Treatment 11). It was also observed that thecombination of Sulphur+Diafenthiuron, for e.g. Treatment 6, was highlyeffective against the mite population for a longer duration as comparedto Treatment 10 and Treatment 11 with individual actives at higherconcentrations showing the synergy between Sulphur and Diafenthiuron.

It was also noticed that the SC formulation Sulphur 37.5%+Diafenthiuron17.5% SC at 562.5+262.5 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 8) showed good efficacyover the population of white fly and mites and the better control ofpest population for a longer period of time was also observed. Further,the presence of sulphur in the composition exhibited an enhancedflowering and boll formation as compared to treatment with individualactives providing the necessary sulphur nutrition.

Example 9 Bioefficacy of Sulphur+Novaluron

The treatments were carried out in Hissar district of Haryana state inIndia using okra (Abelmoschus esculentus Moench) crop followingrandomized block design with four replications and nine treatments witha plot size of 3.6×6.0 m. All the agronomic practices were adopted asper recommendations.

The treatments were carried out after the first signs of infestations,about four weeks after planting, and single spray was made afterdevelopment of sufficient population of shoot and fruit borer, Eariasvitella and mite, Tetranychus spp on plants after 35-45 days of sowing.Five plants were selected randomly in each plot and tagged. On eachplant, three twigs selected randomly were observed critically usingmagnifying lens (for mites) and the number of shoot, fruit bore and mitewere counted before as well as after the 3rd, 7th, 10th and 15th days ofspraying. It is also to be noted the live shoot and fruit borer, Eariasvitella was counted by the activity of pest on the top twig portion,where it causes damage.

The treatments included combinations of Sulphur+Novaluron with varyingconcentration of the active ingredients, Sulphur 80% WG stand alone andNovaluron 10% EC stand-alone use as standards for comparison along withan untreated control. The treatments were applied as indicated in thetable below.

TABLE 9 Active Formulation Average no. of shoot and fruit Average no. ofmite/twig/plant ingredients Dosage borer per row of 25 plant inparticular period (grams/ grams/ Before 3rd 7th 10th 15th Before 3rd 7th10th 15th Treatment Composition hectare) hectare spray DAS DAS DAS DASspray DAS DAS DAS DAS 1 Sulphur 70% + 1050 + 150 1500 19 7 0 0 0 50 16 41 0 Novaluron 10% WDG 2 Sulphur 70% + 1050 + 105 1500 16 8 3 0 0 55 13 62 0 Novaluron 7% WDG 3 Sulphur 75% + 1125 + 75  1500 14 8 3 0 0 69 18 83 0 Novaluron 5% WDG 4 Sulphur 80% +  1200 + 37.5 1500 18 9 7 3 2 49 126 3 1 Novaluron 2.5% WD G 5 Sulphur 40% + 600 + 30 1500 15 5 2 0 0 62 167 3 0 Novaluron 2% SC 6 Sulphur 35% +   525 + 18.75 1500 20 10 7 9 11 5421 12 8 14 Novaluron 1.25% SC 7 Sulphur 80% 1250 1500 12 10 13 12 15 6015 6 3 0 WG 8 Novaluron  75 750 15 7 7 2 1 47 32 18 9 11 10% EC 9Untreated — — 10 11 13 15 15 15 18 18 20 20 check

It was observed that the applications of Sulphur 70%+Novaluron 10% WDGat 1050+150 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 1), Sulphur 70%+Novaluron 7% WDG at1050+105 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 2), Sulphur 75%+Novaluron 5% WDG at1125+75 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 3) and Sulphur 80%+Novaluron 2.5% WDG at1200+37.5 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 4) were found most effective intreatment against shoot and fruit borer after the 3rd, 7th, 10th and15th days of spraying as compared to the individual application ofSulphur 80% WG (Treatment 7) and Novaluron 10% EC (Treatment 8). Infact, Treatment 3 showed very good control for a longer duration despiteusing lower amount of active ingredients as compared to the stand alonetreatments of the active ingredients (Treatments 7 and 8).

It was also noticed that the SC formulation Sulphur 40%+Novaluron 2% SCat 600+30 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 5) showed good efficacy in treatmentagainst shoot and fruit borer and the better control of pest populationup to longer period of time was also observed. It was observed that thecombination of Sulphur+Novaluron, were highly effective against the mitepopulation as compared to Treatment 8 and Treatment 9 with individualactives at higher concentrations. It was also observed that residualimpact of combination avoided resurgence in mite population (Treatment3) after 10th, 15th days after spray. Further, the presence of sulphurexhibited an enhanced flowering and boll formation, increased yield ascompared to the treatment with individual actives.

Example 10 Bioefficacy of Sulphur+Flubendiamide

The trials were carried out in Surat district of Gujarat state wherecommercial okra is grown in India using okra (Abelmoschus esculentusMoench) crop following a randomized block design with four replicationsand nine treatments, including control with a plot size of 3.6×6.0 m.All the agronomic practices were adopted as per recommendations.

The treatments were carried out after the first signs of infestationsabout four weeks after planting, single spray was made after developmentof sufficient population of shoot and fruit borer, Earias vitella andmite, Tetranychus spp on plants after 35-45 days of sowing. Five plantswere selected randomly in each plot and tagged. On each plant, threetwigs selected randomly were observed critically using magnifying lens(for mites) and the number of shoot, fruit bore and mite were countedbefore as well as after the 3rd, 7th, 10th and 15th days of spraying. Itis also to be noted, the live shoot and fruit borer, Earias vitella wascounted by the activity of pest at the top twig portion, where it causesdamage.

The treatments included combinations of Sulphur+Flubendiamide withvarying concentration of the active ingredients, Sulphur 80% WG standalone and Flubendiamide 20% WG stand-alone use as standards forcomparison along with an untreated control. The treatments were appliedas indicated in the table below:

TABLE 10 Average no. of Active Formulation Average no. of shoot andfruit mite/twig/plant in ingredients Dosage in borer per row of 25plants particular period (grams/ grams/ Before 3rd 7th 10th 15th Before3rd 7th 10th 15th Treatment Composition hectare) hectare spray DAS DASDAS DAS spray DAS DAS DAS DAS 1 Sulphur 75% + 1125 + 90  1500 21 4 0 0 059 14 4 2 0 Flubendiamide 6% WDG 2 Sulphur 60% + 900 + 60 1500 16 6 2 00 55 13 6 2 0 Flubendiamide 4% WDG 3 Sulphur 70% + 1050 + 45  1500 14 83 0 0 69 18 8 0 0 Flubendiamide 3% WDG 4 Sulphur 80% + 1200 + 15  150018 9 7 3 2 49 12 6 3 1 Flubendiamide 1% WDG 5 Sulphur 40% + 600 + 301500 15 5 2 0 0 62 16 7 3 0 Flubendiamide 2.5% SC 6 Sulphur 25% + 375 +15 1500 18 9 6 8 9 62 16 7 3 13 Flubendiamide 1% SC 7 Sulphur 80% 12501500 12 10 13 12 15 60 15 6 3 0 WG 8 Flubendiamide  50 250 15 6 3 1 0 4740 18 9 11 20% WG 9 Untreated check — — 10 11 13 15 15 15 18 18 20 20

It was observed that the applications of Sulphur 75%+Flubendiamide 6%WDG at 1125+90 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 1), Sulphur 70%+Flubendiamide 3%WDG at 1050+45 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 3) and Sulphur 60%+Flubendiamide4% WDG 900+60 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 2) were found to be highlyeffective in treatment against shoot and fruit borer after the 3rd, 7th,10th and 15th days of spraying as compared to the individual applicationof Sulphur 80% WG (Treatment 7) and Flubendiamide 20% EG (Treatment 8).It is to be noted that Treatment 1 and 2 exhibited Powdery mildewinfection below economic threshold levels (ETL).

It was also noticed that the SC formulation Sulphur 40%+Flubendiamide2.5% SC at 600+30 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 5) showed good efficacy intreatment against shoot and fruit borer. A better control of pestpopulation up to longer period of time was also observed, despite usinglower quantities of active ingredients (Treatments 3,) as compared tothe stand alone treatments at higher dosages (Treatments 7, 8). Further,the presence of sulphur exhibited an enhanced flowering and bollformation, as compared to treatment with individual actives, while alsocontrolling powdery mildew.

Example 11 Bioefficacy of Sulphur+Spirotetramat

The field trials were carried out in the Akola district of Maharashtrastate in India on cotton and following a randomized block design withfour replications and nine treatments with a plot size of 3.6×6.0 m. Thevarieties viz., Bt cotton, CV Vikram-5, were transplanted inexperimental fields. All the agronomic practices were adopted as perrecommendations.

The treatments were carried out after a sufficient population of aphidsand mites was developed on the plants after 20-25 days of transplanting.Five plants were selected randomly in each plot and tagged. On eachplant, three twigs selected randomly were observed critically for themites and the number of aphids and mites were counted before as well asafter the 3rd, 7th, 10th and the 15th days of each spraying.

The treatments included combinations of Sulphur and Spirotetramat withvarying concentration of the active ingredients, Sulphur 80% WG standalone and Spirotetramat 15% OD stand alone use as standards forcomparison along with an untreated control. The treatments were appliedas indicated in the table below:

TABLE 11 Average no. of Average no. of Active Formulationaphids/twig/plant in mite/twig/plant in ingredient Dosage in particularperiod particular period (grams/ grams/ Before 3rd 7th 10th 15th Before3rd 7th 10th 15th Treatment Composition hectare) hectare spray DAS DASDAS DAS spray DAS DAS DAS DAS 1 Sulphur 50% +  750 + 195 1500 60 22 5 00 55 25 18 13 15 Spirotetramat 13% WDG 2 Sulphur 1125 + 105 1500 68 20 30 0 58 20 9 5 0 75% + Spirotetramat 7% WDG 3 Sulphur 80% + 1200 + 60 1500 72 25 7 0 0 69 15 8 0 0 Spirotetramat 4% WDG 4 Sulphur 80% + 1200 +45  1500 60 28 20 18 20 49 12 4 0 0 Spirotetramat 3% WDG 5 Sulphur 40% +  600 + 97.5 1500 55 22 20 10 8 62 16 3 0 0 Spirotetramat 6.5% SC 6Sulphur 25% + 375 + 30 1500 55 22 20 10 8 62 16 3 0 0 Spirotetramat 2%SC 7 Sulphur 80% 1250 1500 48 40 38 40 37 60 15 6 3 0 WG 8 Spirotetramat 90 600 46 30 12 10 14 47 32 18 9 11 15% OD 9 Untreated — — 62 69 64 7066 58 60 65 62 70 check

It was observed that the application of Sulphur 75%+Spirotetram at 7%WDG at 1125+105 g.a.i. per ha (Treatment 2) and Sulphur80%+Spirotetramat 4% WDG at 1200+60 g.a.i. per ha (Treatment 3) werehighly effective and superior after the 3rd, 7th, 10th and the 15th daysafter spraying in controlling the pest population as compared to theindividual application of Sulphur 80% WG (Treatment 7) and Spirotetramat15% OD (Treatment 8) used at a much higher concentration of actives(particularly observed in Treatment 3).

It was observed that the combination of Sulphur and Spirotetramat, werehighly effective against the mite population as compared to Treatment 7and Treatment 8 with individual actives at higher concentrations. Theknock down effect of mites was visible in Treatment 1, 2 and 3 becauseof the presence of the sulphur.

It was also observed in the case the SC formulation, that application ofSulphur 40%+Spirotetramat 6.5% SC at 600+97.5 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 5)showed good efficacy in controlling the pest population for longerduration effectively as compared to Treatment 7 and Treatment 8 withindividual actives. Further, the presence of sulphur in the compositionexhibited an enhanced flowering and boll formation as compared totreatment with individual actives.

Example 12 Bioefficacy of Sulphur+Thiamethoxam

The trials were carried out in Rajkot district of Gujarat state m Indiaon cotton following a randomized block design with four replications andten treatments with a plot size of 3.6×6.0 m. The varieties viz., Btcotton, CV Vikram-5, were transplanted in experimental fields. All theagronomic practices were adopted as per recommendations.

The treatments were carried after development of sufficient populationsof aphids and mites on plants after 20-25 days of transplanting. Fiveplants were selected randomly in each plot and tagged. On each plant,three twigs selected randomly were observed critically using themagnifying lens for mites and the number of aphids and mites werecounted before as well as after the 3rd, 7th, 10th and 15th days ofafter each spraying.

The treatments included combinations of Sulphur+Thiamethoxam withvarying concentration of the active ingredients, Sulphur 80% WG standalone and Thiamethoxam 25% WG stand alone use as standards forcomparison along with an untreated control. The treatments were appliedas indicated in the table below:

TABLE 12 Active Formulation ingredients Dosage in Average no. of Averageno. of (grams/ grams/ aphids/twig/plant in particular mite/twig/plant inparticular hectare) hectare period period Active Dosage/ha Before 3rd7th 10th 15^(th) Before 3rd 7th 10th 15th Treatment Compositioningredient (gm) spray DAS DAS DAS DAS spray DAS DAS DAS DAS 1 Sulphur750 + 75 1500 58 14 0 0 0 55 34 11 6 6 50% + Thiamethoxam 5% WDG 2Sulphur 900 + 60 1500 53 11 4 2 0 50 22 9 4 4 60% + Thiamethoxam 4% WDG3 Sulphur 1050 + 45  1500 68 20 3 0 0 55 13 6 2 0 70% + Thiamethoxam 3%WDG 4 Sulphur 1125 + 30  1500 72 25 7 2 0 69 18 8 0 0 75% + Thiamethoxam3% WDG 5 Sulphur  1200 + 22.5 1500 60 28 15 8 20 49 12 4 0 0 80% +Thiamethoxam 1.5% WDG 6 Sulphur   600 + 37.5 1500 55 22 8 3 0 62 16 3 00 40% + Thiamethoxam 2.5% SC 7 Sulphur   375 + 10.05 1500 50 28 11 15 1965 24 15 12 10 25% + Thiamethoxam 0.67% SC 8 Sulphur 1250 1500 48 40 3840 37 60 20 6 3 0 80% WG 9 Thiamethoxam  25 100 46 30 15 18 20 47 32 189 11 25% WG 10 Untreated — — 62 69 64 70 66 58 60 65 62 70 check

It was observed that the applications of Sulphur 70%+Thiamethoxam 3% WDGat 1050+45 g.a.i. per ha (Treatment 3), Sulphur 70%+Thiamethoxam 3% WDG,Sulphur 50%+Thiamethoxam 5% WDG at 750+75 g.a.i. per ha (Treatment 1)and Sulphur 60%+Thiamethoxam 4% WDG at 900+60 g.a.i. per ha (Treatment2) were most effective and superior after the 3rd, 7th, 10th and 15thdays of spray as compared to the individual application of Sulphur 80%WG (Treatment 8) and Thiamethoxam 25% WG (Treatment 9).

It was also observed that residual impact of combination avoidedresurgence in mite population (Treatment 4 and 5) after 10th, 15th daysafter spray.

All the WDG formulations of, Sulphur+Thiamethoxam at all the four doses(g.a.i. /ha) was found effective against aphids than the individualapplication of actives. Thus, Aphids can be effectively managed byspraying of compositions of Sulphur plus Thiamethoxam. The formulationswere also found to be safer to the user as well as to the environment.

It was also noticed that the SC formulation of Sulphur 40%+Thiamethoxam2.5% SC at 600+37.5 g.a.i. per ha (Treatment 6), showed a betterefficacy over the population of aphids and mites and a good control ofaphids up to the 7th day of spraying when compared with the standaloneapplications of Sulphur 80% WG (Treatment 8) and Thiamethoxam 25% WG(Treatment 9) used at a much higher concentration of actives.

It was observed that the combination of Sulphur+Thiamethoxam were highlyeffective against the mite population as compared to Treatment 8 withindividual application of Sulphur at a higher concentration. Apart fromthe bio-efficacy, the presence of sulphur in the composition exhibitedan enhanced flowering and boll formation in cotton as compared totreatment with individual actives.

Example 13A Bioefficacy of Sulphur and Imidacloprid

The treatments were carried out in Rajkot district of Gujarat state inIndia on cotton with combinations of Sulphur and Imidacloprid in varyingconcentration of active ingredients with Sulphur 80% WG used alone andImidacloprid 70% WG used alone as standard, along with an untreatedcontrol. The treatments were as in the table 13A below.

The treatments were laid out on a randomized block design with fourreplications and ten treatments with a plot size of 3.6×6.0 m onvarieties of Bt cotton, CV Vikram-5. All the agronomic practices wereadopted as per recommendations.

The treatments were carried out after development of sufficientpopulation of white fly and mites on plants after 20-25 days oftransplanting. Five plants were selected randomly in each plot andtagged. On each plant, three twigs selected randomly were observedcritically using magnifying lens (for mites) and the number of jassidsand mites were counted before as well as after the 3rd, 7th, 10th and15th days of spraying:

TABLE 13A Average no. of Average no. of Active Formulationjassids/twig/plant in particular mite/twig/plant in particularingredients Dosage in period period (grams/ grams/ Before 3rd 7th 10th15th Before 3rd 7th 10th 15th Treatment Composition hectare) hectarespray DAS DAS DAS DAS spray DAS DAS DAS DAS 1 Sulphur 70% + 1050 + 60 1500 73 20 7 0 0 52 28 7 0 4 Imidacloprid 4% WDG 2 Sulphur 50% + 750 +45 1500 60 22 5 0 0 55 34 18 13 15 Imidacloprid 3% WDG 3 Sulphur 60% +900 + 30 1500 68 20 3 0 0 58 27 9 5 0 Imidacloprid 2% WDG 4 Sulphur70% +  1050 + 22.5 1500 72 25 7 0 0 69 18 8 0 0 Imidacloprid 1.5% WDG 5Sulphur 80% + 1200 + 15  1500 60 28 20 18 20 49 12 4 0 0 Imidacloprid 1%WDG 6 Sulphur 40% +   600 + 22.5 1500 51 13 7 3 0 56 10 3 0 2Imidacloprid 1.5% SC 7 Sulphur 25% +  375 + 7.5 1500 55 22 20 10 8 62 2915 6 8 Imidacloprid 0.5% SC 8 Sulphur 80% 1250 1500 48 40 38 40 37 60 156 3 0 WG 9 Imidacloprid    24.5 35 46 30 15 10 14 47 32 18 9 11 70% WG10 Untreated — — 62 69 64 70 66 58 60 65 62 70 check

The table indicates that application, of first four treatments amongstWDG formulations of Sulphur 70%+Imidacloprid 4% WG at 1050+60 g.a.i. perha (Treatment 1), Sulphur 50%+Imidacloprid 3% WDG at 750+45 g.a.i. perha (Treatment 2), Sulphur 60%+Imidacloprid 2% WDG at 900+30 g.a.i. perha (Treatment 3), and Sulphur 70%+Imidacloprid 1.5% WDG at 1050+22.5g.a.i. per hectare respectively (Treatment 4) were found highlyeffective after 3rd, 7th, 10th and 15th days after spray in controllingjassid populations as compared to individual treatment with sulphur 80%WG (Treatment 8) and Imidacloprid 70% WG (Treatment 9).

It was also observed that the first four treatments of WDG (Treatments 1to 4) provided control for a longer duration over the jassid populationsthan the imidacloprid 70% WG (Treatment 9) used alone. Further, thecombination of Sulphur 70%+Imidacloprid 1.5% WDG at 1050+22.5 g.a.i. perhectare (Treatment 4 and 5) were effective against mite population forlonger duration as compared to sulphur 80% WG (Treatment 8) used alone.

In case of SC formulation, Sulphur 40%+Imidacloprid 1.5% SC at 600+22.5g.a.i. per hectare (Treatment 6) was found superior in controlling thepest population of jassid as well as mite effectively for longerduration effectively as compared to Treatment 8 and Treatment 9 withindividual actives at higher concentrations.

Further, the presence of sulphur along with imidacloprid exhibited anenhanced flowering and boll formation as compared to treatment withindividual actives.

Example 13 B Bioefficacy of Sulphur+Imidacloprid Granule

The trials were conducted on sugarcane in Lucknow district of UttarPradesh State in India with six treatments and four replications. Thetreatments included granular compositions of Sulphur and Imidacloprid invarying concentrations with standalone applications of Sulphur 80% WGused and standalone application of Imidacloprid 70% WG used as standardsfor comparison, along with an untreated control. The treatments wereevaluated against termites on sugarcane.

Each treatment had 25 suckers planted in a row, the whole application ofall the treatments was conducted along with sets in the furrows at thetime of planting and the same doses were applied at 45th DAP. All theagronomic practices were adopted as per recommendations.

The data in Table 13B below represents the cumulative presentation afterboth the application (at planting and at 45th Days after planting). Thegermination percentage was noted down in all the treatments andreplications:

TABLE 13B Active Formulation Dosage Mean germination ingredients ingrams/ percentage after Yield Treatment Composition (grams/hectare)hectare 50th DAP (ton/ha) 1 Sulphur 90% + 13500 + 45 15000 94 108Imidacloprid 0.3 Gr. 2 Sulphur 80% + 12000 + 30 15000 92 103Imidacloprid 0.2% Gr. 3 Sulphur 70% + 10500 + 52 15000 98 110Imidacloprid 0.35% Gr. 4 Sulphur 60% +  9000 + 15 15000 88 100Imidacloprid 0.1% Gr. 5 Sulphur 50% +  7500 + 15 15000 84 98Imidacloprid 0.1% Gr. 6 Sulphur 90% WG 6750  7500 75 87 7 Imidacloprid70% WS 70-105 100-150 gm per 80 92 100 kg sets 8 Untreated check — — 6070

It was observed that the application of Sulphur 70%+Imidacloprid 0.35%Gr. at 10500+52 g.a.i. per ha (Treatment 3) proved to be highlyeffective with 98 percent of successful germination at the 50th dayafter planting and the least percentage of termite attack and alsoresulted in a high yield. It was noticed that on application of Sulphur90%+Imidacloprid 0.3% at 13500+30 g.a.i. per ha (Treatment 1) gave 94percent germination and high yield. The above treatments were highlyefficacious as compared to the individual application of Sulphur 80% WG(Treatment 6) and Imidacloprid 70% WS (Treatment 7) applied at a higherconcentration of actives.

The sulphur when combined with Imidacloprid, not only provided aneffective control over termites but also displayed an increase in thethickness of the sugarcane stem. Besides the internodes length andeventually the height of the cane was significantly improved whencompared with the treatment where sulphur was not used.

The combination of sulphur and Imidacloprid in the composition alsodemonstrated various other benefits such as increase in the girth,height, internode lengths and thickness of the cane as compared to theobservations with the use of imidacloprid alone.

The above composition in practice serves the purpose of simultaneouslymanaging the damage caused by termites found in same medium (soil) andmeeting the need of sulphur fertilizer required in the initial stages ofplant growth. The composition is thereby rendered highly economical andbeneficial to the end-users when compared to the standalone compositionsof Imidacloprid or sulphur. The above composition also restricts theundue loading of a carrier such as sand which is present up to a largeextent in standalone Imidacloprid compositions

Example 14 Bioefficacy of Sulphur and Abamectin

The trial were conducted in Akola district of Maharashtra state in Indiawith several treatments on cotton as indicated in the table belowincluding compositions of sulphur plus abamectin at varyingconcentrations, Sulphur 80% WG standalone and Abamectin 1.9% ECstandalone as standards for comparison, along with an untreated control.The treatments were laid out on a randomized block design with thirteentreatments replicated five times.

The treatments were imposed after sufficient build-up of red spidermites. The pre and post treatment observations on live red spider mitepopulations were assessed on 2nd, 5th, 7th and 10th days after spray.The treatments were as illustrated in the table below:

TABLE 14 Mortality (%) of Live Mite Active Formulation red spider mite,population at 12th ingredients Dosage in grams/ T. macfarlanei day afterspray Treatment Composition (grams/hectare) hectare after 5th DAS (inpercentage) 1 Sulphur 70% + 1050 + 45   1500 92 Nill Abamectin 3% WDG 2Sulphur 65% + 975 + 30  1500 85 Nill Abamectin 2% WDG 3 Sulphur 65% + 975 + 22.5 1500 76 4 Abamectin 1.5% WDG 4 Sulphur 80% + 1200 + 22.51500 75 2 Abamectin 1.5% WDG 5 Sulphur 85% + 1275 + 15  1500 66 7Abamectin 1% WDG 6 Sulphur 90% + 1350 + 7.5 1500 58 13 Abamectin 0.5%WDG 7 Sulphur 90% + 1350 + 3.0 1500 50 16 Abamectin 0.2% WDG 8 Sulphur90% + 1350 + 1.2 1500 48 23 Abamectin 0.08% WDG 9 Sulphur 40% +  600 +22.5 1500 88 Nill Abamectin 1.5% SC 10 Sulphur 32.5% +   487.5 + 11.251500 68 9 Abamectin 0.75% SC 11 Abamectin 1.9% EC  10 533 63 7 12Sulphur 80% WG 1250 1500 70 8 13 Untreated control — — Nill 38

The table indicates that application, of Sulphur 70%+Abamectin 3% WDG at1050+45 g.a.i. per hectare (Treatment!) and Sulphur 65%+Abamectin 2% WDGat 975+30 g.a.i. per hectare (Treatment 2) proved to be very effectivein controlling the red spider mites on leaf area in comparison to thestandard Abamectin 1.9% EC at 10 g.a.i. (Treatment 11) used alone.

The other two compositions of Sulphur 65%+Abamectin 1.5% WDG at 975+22.5g.a.i. per hectare and Sulphur 80%+Abamectin 1.5% WDG 1200+22.5 g.a.i.per hectare (Treatment 3, 4), were also found superior in controllingred spider mites than Abamectin 1.9% EC at 10 g.a.i. (Treatment 11) usedalone and Sulphur 80% WG at 1250 g.a.i. per ha (Treatment 12) used alone

It was also observed that residual impact of combination avoidedresurgence in mite population after 12th days of application.

In case of SC formulations, the application of Sulphur 40%+Abamectinl.5%SC at 600+22.5 g.a.i. per ha (Treatment 9) proved highly effective inreducing the mite population effectively as compared to the individualapplication with Sulphur 80% WG at 1250 g.a.i. per ha (Treatment 12).

It was also observed that with application, of Sulphur 70%+Abamectin 3%WDG at 1050+45 g.a.i. per hectare (Treatment!) and Sulphur 65%+Abamectin2% WDG at 975+30 g.a.i. per hectare (Treatment 2) and Sulphur65%+Abamectin 1.5% WDG at 975+22.5 g.a.i. per hectare (Treatment 3)highest crop yield of 250 quintal, 245 quintal and 230 quintal each perha was recorded in comparison with the application of Abamectin 1.9% ECat 10 g.a.i. per hectare (Treatment 11) and Sulphur 80% WG at 1250g.a.i. per hectare (Treatment 12), wherein the yield was found to be 220quintal & 210 quintals respectively. Thus composition of sulphur andabamectin gave an increased yield of 10 quintals on an average ascompared to the stand alone application of the active ingredients.

Example 15 Bioefficacy of Sulphur and Lambda cyhalothrin

The trials were conducted in Rajkot district of Gujarat state m India onokra (Abelmoschus esculentus Moench) crop following a randomized blockdesign with four replications and twelve treatments on a plot size of3.6×6.0 m. All the agronomic practices were adopted as perrecommendations.

The treatments were carried out after the first signs of infestationsabout four weeks after planting with the treatment being carried outafter development of sufficient population of shoot and fruit borer,Earias vitella and mite, Tetranychus spp on plants after 35-45 days ofsowing. Five plants were selected randomly in each plot and tagged. Oneach plant, three twigs selected randomly were observed critically formites and the number of shoot borer, fruit borer and mites were countedbefore as well as after the 3rd, 7th, 10th and 15th days of spraying. Itis to be noted, that the live shoot and fruit borer, Earias vitella wascounted by the activity of pest at the top twig portion, where it causesdamage.

The treatments included combinations of Sulphur+Lambda cyhalothrin withvarying concentration of the active ingredients, Sulphur 80% WG standalone and Lambda cyhalothrin 5% EC stand-alone use as standards forcomparison along with an untreated control. The treatments were appliedas indicated in the table below:

TABLE 5 Active Average no. of shoot and fruit Average no. ofmite/twig/plant ingredients Formulation borer/plant in particular periodin particular period (grams/ Dosage Before 3rd 7th 10th 15th Before 3rd7th 10th 15th Treatment Composition hectare) in grams/ spray DAS DAS DASDAS spray DAS DAS DAS DAS 1 Sulphur 70% + 1050 + 60  1500 19 6 0 0 0 5714 3 0 0 Lambda cyhalothrin 4% WP 2 Sulphur 40% + 600 + 30 1500 21 13 30 0 52 28 7 0 4 Lambda cyhalothrin 2% WP 3 Sulphur 50% +   750 + 37.51500 23 10 0 0 0 55 20 9 6 4 Lambda cyhalothrin 2.5% WP 4 Sulphur 60%900 + 30 1500 16 7 3 0 0 58 20 9 5 0 Lambda cyhalothrin 2% WP 5 Sulphur70% +  1050 + 22.5 1500 14 6 3 0 0 69 18 8 0 0 Lambda cyhalothrin 1.5%WP 6 Sulphur 80% + 1200 + 15  1500 18 9 7 3 2 49 12 4 0 0 Lambdacyhalothrin 1% WP 7 Sulphur 90% +  1350 + 7.5  1500 21 15 10 7 7 65 12 30 0 Lambda cyhalothrin 0.5% WP 8 Sulphur 80% 1250 1500 12 10 13 12 15 6020 6 3 0 WG 9 Lambda  15 300 15 7 4 1 1 47 32 18 9 11 cyhalothrin 5% EC10 Untreated — — 10 11 13 17 19 58 60 65 62 70 check

It was observed that the applications of Sulphur 70%+Lambda cyhalothrin4% WDG at 1050+60 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 1), Sulphur 60%+Lambdacyhalothrin 2% WDG at 900+30 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 4), Sulphur70%+Lambda cyhalothrin 1.5% WDG 1050+22.5 g.a.i per ha (Treatment 5) andSulphur 80%+Lambda cyhalothrin 1% WDG at 1200+15 g.a.i per ha (Treatment6) were found to be very effective against the shoot and fruit borerinfestation after the 3rd, 7th, 10th and 15th days of spraying ascompared to the individual application of Sulphur 80% WG (Treatment 8)and Lambda cyhalothrin 5% EC (Treatment 9).

It was observed that the combinations of Sulphur+Lambda cyhalothrin,were also superior effective against the mite population for a longerduration as compared to Treatment 8 and Treatment 9 with individualactives at almost similar dosages of application. In particularlyTreatment 5 and 6 showed no mite population after 10th and 15th daysafter spray. Further, the presence of sulphur in the compositionexhibited an enhanced flowering and boll formation as compared totreatment with individual actives. The composition also enabled thesimultaneous control of various sucking pest complex, such the borer andmites, and helped in more number of pickings.

From the foregoing it will be observed that numerous modifications andvariations can be effectuated without departing from the true spirit andscope of the novel concepts of the present invention. It is to beunderstood that no limitation with respect to the specific embodimentsillustrated is intended or should be inferred.

We claim:
 1. A pesticidal composition comprising elemental sulphur inthe range of 32.5% to 90% w/w of the total composition; abamectin, or asalt thereof, in the range of 0.08% to 3.6% w/w of the totalcomposition; and at least one agrochemically acceptable excipient. 2.The pesticidal composition of claim 1, comprising elemental sulphur inthe range of 65% to 90% w/w of the total composition; abamectin or asalt thereof in the range of 0.08% to 3.6% w/w of the total composition;and at least one agrochemically acceptable excipient; wherein thecomposition is in the form of water dispersible granules.
 3. Thepesticidal composition of claim 1, comprising elemental sulphur in therange of 32.5% to 70% w/w of the total composition; abamectin or a saltthereof in the range of 0.75% to 3.6% w/w of the total composition; andat least one agrochemically acceptable excipient; wherein thecomposition is in the form of a suspension concentrate.